34 ms·

Which means it sucks and looks weird on all platforms. The story of Swing.

AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
Which do you care more about: it works, or it looks good? There's a reason Java became such a big platform for business applications and it isn't because it cared about fashion fads.
- hota_mazi 9y ago
  > There's a reason Java became such a big platform for business applications and it isn't because it cared about fashion fads. There's a reason why Java completely failed on the desktop: Swing. > Which do you care more about: it works, or it looks good? Both. I care about both. And you should too. But Swing developers got used to only being able to have one. At most.
  - erikbye 9y ago
    Completely failed? JetBrains' IDEs seem awfully popular, and they are all Java and Swing.
    - megaman22 9y ago
      Jetbrains IDEs could almost have an NCurses GUI, and they would be worth using. How pretty they are is mostly orthogonal.
    - hota_mazi 9y ago
      Can you name another very popular and very good looking Swing application? Even if you can, you can count them on one hand. Swing was a massive failure, and rightfully so, because Swing/JavaFX apps look, and more importantly, feel, like a broken mess. In contrast, SWT/JFace apps look a lot more native and feel extremely snappy. Apps build on the Eclipse RCP are in general pretty decent looking and they enable all the native controls and functionalities of the host platform.
  - AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
    > Both. I care about both. And you should too. Why? What value is looking good? There's value in a well designed responsive UX, but how it looks is completely meaningless to me because it doesn't help me get shit done.
- outworlder 9y ago
  It is not only about looking good. Non-native widgets break user interaction is small but irritating ways. If you are going for non-native widgets, they should at least look good. Otherwise you get the worst of both worlds.
kuschku 9y ago
Or the story of Electron.

Which do you care more about: it works, or it looks good? There's a reason Java became such a big platform for business applications and it isn't because it cared about fashion fads.

hota_mazi 9y ago
> There's a reason Java became such a big platform for business applications and it isn't because it cared about fashion fads. There's a reason why Java completely failed on the desktop: Swing. > Which do you care more about: it works, or it looks good? Both. I care about both. And you should too. But Swing developers got used to only being able to have one. At most.
- erikbye 9y ago
  Completely failed? JetBrains' IDEs seem awfully popular, and they are all Java and Swing.
  - megaman22 9y ago
    Jetbrains IDEs could almost have an NCurses GUI, and they would be worth using. How pretty they are is mostly orthogonal.
  - hota_mazi 9y ago
    Can you name another very popular and very good looking Swing application? Even if you can, you can count them on one hand. Swing was a massive failure, and rightfully so, because Swing/JavaFX apps look, and more importantly, feel, like a broken mess. In contrast, SWT/JFace apps look a lot more native and feel extremely snappy. Apps build on the Eclipse RCP are in general pretty decent looking and they enable all the native controls and functionalities of the host platform.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago
  > Both. I care about both. And you should too. Why? What value is looking good? There's value in a well designed responsive UX, but how it looks is completely meaningless to me because it doesn't help me get shit done.
outworlder 9y ago
It is not only about looking good. Non-native widgets break user interaction is small but irritating ways. If you are going for non-native widgets, they should at least look good. Otherwise you get the worst of both worlds.

kuschku 9y ago

Or the story of Electron.